E 433 
.D27 


FLM 

2015 

021041 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



00005022174 














































<* ' 


? 'V . 

« 0 V *< # °* ^ v **** 

•V .Wa’o <$> ,< % 


^' v .« ^ 


0 # 



o - *0 




^ <*> 

V • •»*• <y 

. 9 * ►«*•, v v t » ,v * 

& -V^^V* ^ ^ ♦ 


aV** - 
* ♦* ■%> * 


* ^ CL 

s <L r ^ * 


,* ah’ O. % 


0° .wasi-. ^ / . 

; *bi? «° 

/ !>°'%. - 

. . 0 • ., 0 ° ^ * * . . , 



V> <> * • * • «0 

G 6 0 * * 4 (V • *■ 



- r, . v * 
* +U A 


^0 


• ■^ -V ■*" ~* 
.*♦ ^ > v * 

*• •VJ&.'O'* & <* •, 

* <v - * 

„ 0 .V . C J«^*. ^#> 



: 

,♦ «.r e* % 

•- 

* av-v 

4 



<* *^V«* «6 V A <+ ' - - • 

* ♦ "O & 0 * ° « <£ „ r\> • fc ' * ♦ *0 *G c 0 * a <* ^ j. 

G J**>JY?7n- + O . 1 ^ • ^ P 




V 





“. ■’W .' 

„ A? 0 -* 5.°^ . 

«VJ V. * « , *. ^ O * e N o .0 <5>, 4 » i •. • <J> 

.0 *»••* > V c\ «<y *> V *»V 

A iV **<3LJ9 * ^ Z *f> X -J> > (2 • «v A * £0&SI 

* ' > " a!V : •• 



•s 

V 

>. •- 

*•- ^ , 0 ^ ,-y'- ^o„ 

LTTt * > ^v "*• /s^\ii///s<^^ ^ 4 "t> 




^ «*. 



4 A ^ ^ 

° * *■ " aV 'C*' . ► « ' 4 O ' ^ ’ ° • 

A o » a %£ ^ t , # *^_ 

N \ <^vS\v\ h"^k ^ ’ r 5 r v , . ^ ♦.ffilr oC-tz, * ° , 

«■ *^» .4 <y 4 *J 

. ^ o • |y|n$w/fc 4 c> V 


i 0 ^ 



. 4 ^ Q 

o ^ 

’ ^o/ • 

n° %> *; 

• *°- ^ 


vp G 

A V ^ : 

- * Av # 

H *V ^ 

* A a <* ‘•'TT**‘ . 0 ’ A -.., 

^ ^ % % G° J is 

• *0 k &£* *bt? • 

• „h q,. : 




• * n * <v 

v °v* 



G V 0 o » O 4 *<6 

^ ♦ _f^N\ *P 



,° ^° ^ +<&ZZIIW' A 

<5>, * * ' * ^ 


*9* 




iy % * 4 '* * *0 JK&' e. 0 * « A '<?*. ^V . w • a 



v f . 

► * 

^c , 7 4 

^•”^ 0 . WJ|W* A ^ v V : . 

'”•*’ A^ <> 'TV.' .0 

% A 4 ,«- 

-o/ «' 

e v*» *• _ 

/ ^ \^W* 

^ f 0 ^ ^ ^ 

‘ ^ ' 

: * v 

* ^ ^ •: 

♦ 


<> A* 

’!' \ c 

4 * 0 X 

* A q> 

v <L y *£* « 

•♦ Jy c\ \ 

<T ^ * * * 0 A v '<f> 




V’ .vViG.'* . 0 ’ <* v .»** 



i°-n# 



V % -o^ *’ *° 

- ^ ^ .*«r* ■%. / .* 


* aV^ 

* <F % ■ 


A ««"••. ^ 4 >- ‘ ‘ ’ & . . » . V **J J “ ’ ‘ ^ ^ * 




4 

-i 4 


* • 




v • * 



'’o K 


/ 4 °^ ^ 0 -* -.«»»• V^SSr: 4 

.,0' ^0 tf-^ ‘./I* 1 ^ Oj ' * „ , 0 .o' ‘-K, *0^,0** 

/ **;-.\ .* v V*’ 

^ A ip 

. v ^ 'Afy,* .y ■* 



0 ^ 
o 

* **•% 




^ ° • * <V *VV • * 'o. * * A <. *7 

°o A 4 ,0 4 t - l '-o *b, Vl> c«V>o -b. 

Z£%> ■» ... aN % «SSSW* v* . C +W%*>* ° .A* •jsSSW* ^ 


" ++o< 


f f iK 

• A ^ 

»-•’ A 0 V , 

4^ *1,*^ > V ** 

/T ^ A* - 

\Wm% ° ^ °jv ® 

t* ♦ ****♦' A 4 ^ ^ * 


A o. 

A y<v « 

** Cv % 

$* __ °^ ••• 



• • 


* * \ 

* A "i * -* 

a 9 * #, i • 

'- cv *<y *< #0 * *> 

^ zWm o ... : 




i / - . j v *w<3n>flt 1 iiT g>*y o 

4* ** ^ *^2SIs^* A 7 

• <. <o ~ »’ <G V "O •'•’• 7* A <^ <A ^7t*' ^ 

■'•o 9 -<<* 2 ^- «bi? ^d* . 

“ j.°-v '?<zm*' 4 , °^ ■ 

•' 1 4*er ^ * •«« 



,‘ > c> % „ . 

" ’ * A.... %.*•*• A 0 




► 9 » 


aO* V V L * 

* ^ ^ ^fA°o % *+ '' 

** v % '-y&ps J^\ \ 

o *o. ; * A. > +j*wr** r % ' fX* k vf, 

^ JL^ 6 0 " • 4 ^ “ n V # t # . ^ 




’ ° 0 'r-^* O o if. v 

- > .m*. V a 4 o.«5=.. 

° . ip C,v 




aV«\ 

* ^ ^ •. 


* 4? '\ °o 

of- ^ - 0 ^, 7 ^ A 

,0 V 'o jA'’ c 0- «♦ 

» »° if., «5 -.vm^.o 

'<._ ••' f- .. ... .oO° 



V’ do a 0“ ..”>. V .o^L'o .0* -*• 



. / 
v w. ; '-ym : A •. 

• A <. ^.?V* *G V \b -o**- A ^ *4 

C ** * & 4 A^I # t 9 B ^ A&* * 0 ^ ® 

^ « t-xr^Nv ^ ^ ^ ® t _ /v^7_ *# ^ ^ #-x>tVv ^ ^ 













The Democratic Party as it Was and as itjs! 


S PEECH OF HOIST. TIMOTHY C. DAY, 

OF OHIO, 

IN THE HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES, 

April 23, 1856. 


■ Mr. Chairman, in the eddying 
li;. A, f;.*: i.< 1 11:e din of clashing arms and the 
voar of artillery, when the murky clouds of 
i rtav - v ird wreathing smoke become too dense 
tor the toll . >rk to go successfully on, there 
storm of human passion, to give 
• . . to t jmbatants, and enable them to 
i , i ' . nd from foe. So, in the milder 

•. or t! . of the political arena, in the wordy 
war of .• and the thunder of the press, 
whe . a e! ad of platforms obscures the field, it 
be■ n les cessary to have some pause, to ex- 
■ the rand, to see what changes of posi- 
fcions have < curred—to study, decide, and 
tight on. To my mind, such a time is now 
i.}>. i u-'. . for one, I frankly confess that I 

I of a changes which need explanations, 

we can hope to have results ex- 
■ . . . o i pose only a cursory glance at 
i'i ' main .-.1 of the political battle-field for 

II drty years, to trace the growth of an 
i: r .ert why has embraced in its folds the 
! emo( r.< • oarty of the past, and made of it a 
i ago woru » of new doctrines, resolves, and 
wire-drawn - forms. 

Since ’>e eeting of this House, during the 
st i f ;• throagh which we passed in the elec- 
tio. ' H Speaker, and since, we have had many 
tbl: f s on Democracy, by those whose 

* i inet it lias been, iu times past, to act as 
tutors ; and w 3 have also had some efforts in 
thal 1 no fro n ; upils, whose rapid progress in 
t)ic 1 !* i 'cmocraric studies, if not a marvel to 
the .r :,-J / r., s so to some of us. I have listen¬ 
ed r ' . h : angues with some interest, satis¬ 
fied that 1 had widely diverged from the old 
paths, or tk it lights unknown to the past had 
recently been c scovered, which were patent to 
the it- w, wlu, in the kindness of their hearts, 
were willing - illuminate the uninitiated. But 
my •< Mention has been fruitless; either the pupil 
is tec obtus , < v the teachers are not as acute 
as b y sbou d be. I see upon this floor mem- 
bei: • ' c :c lives have been passed in battling 
against Democratic ideas and measures—mem¬ 
bers ho have won for themselves laurels for 
fore;:.-be ability in furious onslaughts on what 
they then deemed a Pandora’s box of human 


evils—the Democratic party; members who 
can boast long years of scarred service in an¬ 
tagonism to Democratic principles and leaders, 
and who now speak of their affiiliation with 
what they call Democracy with all the staid¬ 
ness of old soldiers, instead of the blush of the 
new recruit. And I will do them the justice 
to say, that I believe they are consistent in all 
this; that their present position has not requir¬ 
ed for them any surrender of the past; that 
they now stand where they have always stood. 
In the reeept dismemberment of parties, when 
the one they loved and cherished for its con¬ 
servative qualities died of political marasmus, 
it left to the hot-headed, impetuous rival which 
had fought it long and gallantly, the danger¬ 
ous legacy of rts interests, and the care of an 
estate so encumbered and mortgaged, that, af¬ 
ter a few years of painful struggles, it will end 
in the ruin of its possessors. The remains have 
been followed to their final resting-place by de¬ 
voted servitors, whose dropping tears have 
been dried, and joy quickened in their heart 
by the more than fraternal endearments of the 
special legatee of the dear defunct. Hence, the 
position of the gentlemen to whom I have al¬ 
luded, and thousands elsewhere, throughout the 
length and breadth of our Republic, whose be¬ 
lief in the doctrine of the transmigration of 
souls has been fully and joyfully realized. 

It has been the pride of my life to rank my¬ 
self as a Democrat; it is yet my boast, though 
not connected with the party which has the 
name, but not the soul, I venerate. We frequent¬ 
ly hear allusions on this floor to ancestry—of 
the Cavaliers and Huguenots of the Old World; 
and, though I have but little of that description 
of veneration, I, too, can point to a Demo¬ 
cratic ancestry, which may be equalled, but not 
excelled—where, from grandfather to grandson, 
no vote has been cast other than for Democrats 
for Presidents, from Thomas Jefferson down— 
down to Franklin Pierce. And now I find my¬ 
self in antagonism to what is called the Demo¬ 
cratic party; for, when it inherited its legacy of 
conservatism, it did not change its name, al¬ 
though it did its principles; and, like those of 
old who went into the wilderness, I am force4 












2 


£433 


to wait for the smiting of the rock of the future, 
out of which is to gush the pure waters of prin¬ 
ciple, of which the people may drink and be 
made glad again. 

No one can shut his eyes to the fact, that a 
great change has taken place within a very short 
period of time; that that party which, under 
Jefferson, was born to lead the vanguard of the 
Republican army against the conservatism of 
Federalism; which was assaulted at its birth 
for its heresies and its radicalisms, but which, 
like the infant Hercules, was too powerful to be 
crushed; which grew in strength and power, 
nurtured by clearly-defined principles of equal 
and exact justice to all; and which had the love 
of every heart not chilled by the iey breath of 
conservatism, drawing to itself all who had en¬ 
ergy, talent, and soul, a desire to advance, and 
the nerve to act. This party was the Democratic 
party. For half a century it was the star of 
hope for the oppressed everywhere; it led in 
every conflict with privileged power; it was the 
citadel and strength of every movement of the 
people. Under such a leader as Andrew Jack- 
son, it dared to question the might of the great¬ 
est moneyed power our Republic has known, 
and in that contest, as in all others with con¬ 
servatism, it came off victorious. When the 
people of Rhode Island, who had long suffered 
the loss of their inalienable rights, under a char¬ 
ter granted by a King, and used by conservatism 
to prolong its power, wished to free themselves 
of their yoke, this party ranged itself on their 
side, though the means to be used were revolu¬ 
tionary. It proclaimed as its mission the en- 
franchisment of the oppressed, and it acted in 
consonance with its preachings. It was the rad¬ 
ical, progressive, revolutionary party, opposed 
to the “law and order” of conservatism. Where 
is that party now ? That great and glorious 
party of the past, with its living ideas, resolves, 
and bold deeds, is now, by the decease of its old 
antagonist, the inheritor of “ law and order; ” 
instead of being the party of the people, it is the 
party of privileged power. With one foot on the 
heel and the other on the head of the negro, it 
talks of nothing but “law and order.” The 
lion of Democracy has become the jackal of 
Slavery. 

When we see some wonderful phenomena of 
nature, the mind is naturally led to inquire the 
cause; and in human affairs we should not do 
less. Why is it that its bold, radical, and pro¬ 
gressive policy, has been abandoned, and the 
Democratic party become retrogressive and con¬ 
servative? I have intimated death as one cause— 
the departure of the Whig party having left all 
the soul it had, conservatism, to enter the body 
of the Democratic party; but the great cause 
is, instead of being a party of one idea—pro¬ 
gress, it has become a party of two ideas—Sla¬ 
very and office. I know one-idead parties are 
deemed very reprehensible just now, but I would 
prefer such a party, if the one idea was a good 
one, to the party with two, and both bad. 


In this connection, Mr. Chairman, I desire to 
trace, as briefly and succinctly as possible, the 
growth of one of the ideas now dominant with 
the so-called Democratic party—an idea which 
has frozen all the generous impulses that once 
found a home in that party, and which has 
made of it a receptacle of all that is selfish, all 
that is conservative. It is an idea that, like the 
frozen serpent placed by his hearth By the 
generous farmer, has been warmed by the 
genial rays of our republican sun—strange con¬ 
tradiction !—and now threatens with its fangs 
the very life of Liberty itself. It is an idea 
which is ingrained in the most selfish passions 
of our nature, knowing no law but self—no rule 
but might. It was weak in the first days of 
the Republic, asking only for existence ; now, 
it is bold and arrogant, claiming the right to 
rule where it should always have been a stran¬ 
ger. It is this idea, its growth and present 
demands, which I wish to portray; and, though' 
the colors will necessarily be sombre, the sketch 
will not be the less accurate. 

At the time of the formation of the Constitu¬ 
tion — the “ organic law ” of which we now 
hear so much, and which is so widely and dif¬ 
ferently construed, Slavery existed in twelve of 
the thirteen States that fashioned that instru¬ 
ment. Yet, with this preponderance of slave 
States, so well satisfied were the framers of that 
instrument of the evil tendencies of an institu¬ 
tion which they felt to be out of place in their 
new-born Republic, that their first care was to 
prevent the further importation of slaves, and 
thus shut the door upon a rapid increase of 
that description of property. In the Constitu¬ 
tion, the word “ slave ” was not allowed to in¬ 
trude, either because the name then grated 
harshly on their ears, or that they felt that this 
anomaly should only exist tacitly aud by suf¬ 
ferance for the time necessary for its total ex¬ 
tinction. The Constitution was formed for all 
time; and, with their views, they did not dream 
but that their descendants would gradually and 
finally extinguish Slavery within the bound¬ 
aries of the Republic. The cotemporaneons 
history of that eventful period is plain, as to the 
opposition felt by our fathers on this subject ; 
and their recorded work bears tho impress of 
this feeling. They knew Slavery was a moral 
wrong, and they feared that it would become, 
what we, their descendants,.see it, a political 
evil. 

A few brief years passed away, and the rich 
alluviums of Louisiana, which commanded the 
mouth of the grandest river the world knows, 
attracted the attention of the then infant Re¬ 
public. We had inherited one evil legacy in 
our separation from the mother country, and 
now an addition was to be made to it by her 
ancient rival, France. Slavery existed in the 
Territory of Louisiana, as it exists everywhere, 
in defiance of justice arid right; and, in addition 
to that, it existed there in defiance of positive 
law. The representatives of that 11 reign of 



3 


terror,” as it is fashionable to eall it—when 
the crumbling throne of one of the most ancient 
of the monarchies of Europe had gone down in 
a sea of blood—when the crimes of a thousand 
years were revenged by an exasperated peo¬ 
ple—the representatives of that people did not 
forget, in their own enfranchisement, that there 
were those across the broad Atlantic who 
groaned in slavery. In 1704, the Constitutional 
Assembly of France passed an act of enfran¬ 
chisement, declaring all free within her colonies, 
of which Louisiana was one; but the hurried 
events of that period, the great distance of the 
colony from the mother country, and the speedy 
sale of it to our Republic, prevented the frui¬ 
tion of the benevolent iutentions of those legis¬ 
lators of the “ reign of terror.” 

From this acquisition v/e may date the change 
in the republican policy of our Government. 
The fertility of its soil, and its applicability for 
the growth of cane and cotton, for which unfor¬ 
tunately the slave has the reputation of being 
peculiarly adapted, made this territory the real 
nucleus of American Slavery. It shut up the 
road to the extension of the Western boundary 
of the free States, and paved the way for the 
famous Compromise, over the repeal of which 
this nation is now convulsed, from its centre 
to its extremest points. Beyond the great 
Northwest was a still further West, and in this 
broad domain, acquired from France, it was 
claimed that Slavery existed by “ organic law.” 
This bold assumption of a most dangerous 
dogma—one that has not its parallel except in 
the days of the Wambas, when the vassals of 
the barons of the Old World were held in feudal 
bondage, though they did wear white skins— 
this assumption, I say, from the very boldness 
with which it was urged, was acquiesced in by 
what it is now fashionable to call the “ aggress¬ 
ive North.” 

Another of the crumbling tyrannies of Eu¬ 
rope soon wanted our gold, and we got in ex¬ 
change the peninsula of Florida, and the Slave 
Power got an accession to its rapidly-growing 
boundaries. In both these instances, the strange 
fact was presented of a Republic purchasing 
Slavery from enslaved nations across the At¬ 
lantic ; and, with the isolated exception of 
California, no acquisition of territory made 
since the foundation of our Republic has add¬ 
ed to the strength or to the boundaries of the 
free States. True, Iowa has been carved out 
of the Territory of Louisiana; but how, and for 
what equivalent, I will soon examine. 

At the time of the acquisition of Louisiana, 
seven of the original thirteen States were either 
free, or had taken the initiatory steps towards 
freedom from African Slavery; and the admis¬ 
sion of Louisiana made the tree and slave States 
equal in number. Now commenced the famous 
system of equilibrium, in which Slavery and 
Freedom were made to jog along, pari passu , 
in the fear that, if the former became stronger 
in the councils of the nation than the latter, 


the future would not redeem the hopes of the 
far-seeing statesmen of the South. With the 
immense accession of slave territory, as fur¬ 
nished by France and Spain, began to dawn 
the ambition of a Power which, up to that 
time, had been humble in its pretensions, the 
demands of which we of the present day can 
fully comprehend. Hence the policy, which 
was steadily pursued during thirty years of the 
Republic, from 1820 to 1850, which I have de¬ 
nominated as the system of equilibrium. No 
more single births were to be allowed ; the or¬ 
der of Nature was disturbed, to keep an equi¬ 
librium. Twins, one black and one white, 
were placed into the arms of the Republic at 
each accouchement of the Territories—Maine 
and Missouri, Arkansas and Michigan, Florida 
and Wisconsin, Texa3 and Iowa. Thus were 
four pairs of twins born, and the country went 
on in its quiet, plodding way, never dreaming 
but that it, was all the result of the natural lav/ 
of population, until the Mexican wav laid open 
the wealth of gold discovered in California. 
The citizens of the free States rushed across 
the plains to this new Ophir in such numbers, 
that, before the ever-watchful statesmen of the 
South had prepared for the event, the State of 
California was knocking at the door of the 
Union for admission. Here was a dilemma ! 
The South had got so accustomed to the twin 
system, that this threatened single birth threw 
it into, a fit of consternation. The equilibrium 
was about to be destroyed ; and we all remem¬ 
ber the struggle of 1850, when, instead of twins, 
we got an “ omnibus” load, not of States or 
equilibriums, but of equivalents. The most 
learned political midwives of that period of 
our Republic were in consultation how to rem¬ 
edy the threatened evil; California would not 
wait; the free spirit of her sons was unaccus¬ 
tomed to the restraints and delays needed to 
keep the twin equilibrium perfect. California 
was determined to be born, and the mid¬ 
wives were compelled to assent to what they 
could not prevent or delay. But the mother 
must be saved from the danger of such a vio¬ 
lent birth; and all kinds of opiates were ad¬ 
ministered in one general prescription, labelled 
compromise. 

Ah I what did that birth of California, be¬ 
cause it was a free odg, not cost the North— 
the “aggressive North?” Better that it had 
come iuto the Union as a slave State, than that 
the chalice, filled with bitterness, should have 
been put to the lips of the North! Her states¬ 
men forget that there is at least one thing in 
this world dearer than peace—honor; one thing 
more sacred than the Union—Liberty. They 
consented to a law, at which the self-respect of 
every freeman of the North rebels, and they 
compromised the manhood of the North to 
“preserve the Union.” A free State, made so 
by the sons of the North, who loved Freedom 
because they had been nurtured with its great 
I truths, asked admission into this Republic, and 




4 


it was met at the threshold by delays and deni¬ 
als. It was enough to arouse the whole North, 
to make it stand upon its reserved rights, and 
to demand instead of supplicating; yet its 
statesmen forgot their duty, and compromised 
instead of acting. And yet, gentlemen from 
the South say that the North is “ aggressive; ” 
that we who represent Freedom are arrogant in 
our demands; that the South has suffered much 
for the sake of the Union. I wish it were so ; 
I wish I could shut my eyes to the fact, that 
that North, which is my home, where my life 
has been passed, and whose institutions I love, 
has been true to its honor and dignity in the 
councils of this Republic. But it is not so. 

Mr. Chairman, I have thus rapidly sketched 
the growth of one of the two ideas which I said 
constituted the present Democratic party. I 
have purposely omitted any details of the Mis¬ 
souri Compromise, because it is “ a twice-told 
tale,” and because I have no love for the word. 
Our fathers trusted to the honor of the South, 
and entered into a compact which should have 
been sacred. For its violation I do not hold 
the descendants of those with whom they made 
the agreement as entirely responsible, although 
I think they forgot the ancient chivalry in the 
modern love of power; but for those of the 
North who, from the lust of ambition, forgot 
that their first duty was to their country and 
its free institutions, history has its page, upon 
which will be written, in imperishable letters, 
“ It would have been better for the Republic, 
had these men never lived.” 

Until 1844, the one idea I have just traced 
had not openly appeared as a political power. 
It had been content to reap the advantages 
accruing from the national ambition of our 
people for acquisition of territory, for ^all the 
additions made to our domains gave the pros¬ 
pective advantage to Slavery. The North, in¬ 
stead of being extended, had submitted to cur¬ 
tailment. In 1844, the one idea appeared at 
Baltimore as a political power, and the wisest 
of Democratic statesmen, a man who was im¬ 
bued with the true spirit of Democracy, and 
would not surrender it at the bidding of the 
one idea—I mean Martin Van Bufen—was 
beaten for the nomination of President. The 
free North was for him, because it felt that he 
had been struck down in 1840 unjustly, and 
because he was a true and tried statesman. 
The slave South was against him, because he 
had opposed the acquisition of Texas, a slave 
State. The memorable two-thirds rule was 
passed, and the will of a majority defeated. 
From that year we date doughfaceism; from 
that year the decadence of the principles of 
Democracy, which were replaced by the other 
idea, which I have said constituted one of the 
pair now named the Democratic party. From 
the time of Jefferson, the Democratic party had 
suffered but two reverses. It was the dominant 
party of the Republic; its principles com¬ 
manded the support of the masses of the peo¬ 


ple, because of their truth and justice; and the 
one idea saw in that organization the means of 
permanent advantages; and, like Delilah of 
old, with its lures and wiles of office, it has 
shorn this modern Samson of his strength. 

In 1848, another Northern statesman sought a 
nomination for the Presidency. Warned by the 
fate of Mr.'Van Buren, he wrote a letter, con¬ 
ceding to the South, not all it demanded, but 
enough to pave the way for hope, and as his 
reward he received the nomination he sought. 
But a more reliable man for the South was his 
opponent in the election; and the one idea, true 
to itself at all times, gave its support to the 
candidate who had interests identical with its 
own. Thus, two Northern statesmen—men re¬ 
nowned for their attachment to the principles 
of Democracy, were struck down; one for nom¬ 
ination, because he was still true to the doctrines 
of the father of the church ; the other in the 
election, because the one idea had not received 
an obeisance low enough, and because a slave¬ 
holder was his opponent. 

The ever memorable and accidental adminis¬ 
tration of Fillmore, during which the single 
birth, attended with so much trouble, took 
place, so disgusted the people of the North, 
that they visited a terrible vengeance upon the 
party he was supposed to represent. In the 
nominations and elections of 1852, the one idea 
was on the side of the popular party; and from 
the advent of the present Executive we may 
date the exact and close union of the two ideas— 
Slavery and office. This union needed some 
striking solemnities to inaugurate it in the 
minds of the people—some monument to per¬ 
petuate its political strength, by showing what 
two ideas can do in the councils of a nation. 
The Kansas bill was passed—a compact was 
broken—a majority of Representatives were 
reduced to a minority—rules of legislation were 
violated; and in defiance of the popular will, 
in defiance of right, justice, and public faith, 
two ideas ruled and rioted in the plenitude of 
their power. And, yet, the North is “aggres¬ 
sive.” I wish it were so! Far better would it 
be that the North, representing, as it does, the 
true spirit of our Government—life, action, and 
freedom—should be aggressive, than to be what 
it has been, tame, timid, and compromising. 
A world of trouble would have been saved to 
the future; for the harvest is sown, and the 
crop will be gathered. 

And we, who have passed our lives in the 
Democratic party—we, who have given the 
best proof in our power of our sincere love of 
principle, in refusing to recognise a party in 
which the lust of office is allied with the evil of 
Slavery, as the Democratic party of Jefferson— 
we are told by this party of two ideas that we 
are not Democrats. I am not choice about 
names ; they have too often been the means of 
deceit; and while I am sure that I hold to the 
principles of the past, party designations are 
all of but small moment. We all know, that 



5 


what was Democratic at the North eight years 
ago is not so now 5 at least we who hold to xk& 
old faith are denounced by our political doctortl 
as traitors, and read out of the church as schis¬ 
matics and heretics, beyond the pale of hope. 

Just six years ago, as the editor of a Demo¬ 
cratic organ , I U3ed the following language in 
its columns, and it was then good Democracy: 

“ What does the South want? Her rights in 
1 the Territories ? She has them ? Her citi- 
1 zens are as free to go with their wives and 
1 children, their wagons and horses, as the citi- 
1 zens of the North. Will that not satisfy the 
< South ? Has she some peculiar right which the 
‘ North does not possess, and does not wish? 

‘ Has she the right to take into free Territories 
i a species of property which the free labor of 
1 the North regards as a pestilence, and which 
1 it knows to be its natural enemy ? Most cer- 
‘ tainly not. There is a right stronger than 
1 that claimed by the South—the natural right 
‘ of man. It is a right which overrides all 
‘ others. It is omnipotent, irresistible. It 
‘ acknowledges an equal right, but no superior. 

* It goes hand in hand with its equal, but not 
‘ with the slave. It breathes and lives in the 
‘ pure air of Freedom, and suffocates in the at- 
‘ mosphere of Slavery. It only asserts the 
‘ great principle of life—that of self-preserva- 
1 tion—when it says, the fertile plains and smi- 
‘ ling valleys of our new lands shall he free. If 
1 the South is content with Slavery where it now 
1 exists, wo are. All we ask is, that it shall re- 
1 main where it is.” 

This was Ohio Democracy in 1850. The 
resolutions of its State Conventions breathed 
the same unmistakable language, and under this 
banner of non-extension we marched on to vic¬ 
tory as the Democratic party. But the party 
repudiated its platform, and the Democracy of 
Ohio have repudiated the party. In 1854, when 
a majority of eighty thousand of the people of 
Ohio repudiated the Kansas bill, the nominees 
of the present Democratic party did not dare 
to breast the storm, but preached that act as the 
great charter of Freedom—as an act that was 
to make all the States hereafter to be admitted 
free 5 but the people would not believe them— 
they loved the old Democracy better than the 
new. 

And of what is the present Democratic party 
composed ? I have shown that it has two ideas, 
and in the nature of things, with two such ele¬ 
ments, the collection must be incongruous. 
From extreme radicalism, it has gone over to 
extreme Hunkerism. It is now the conservative, 
Federal party of the Union; and, instead of 
beirig the rollicking, dashing party of the past, 
full of revolutionary designs, it is now staid and 
quiet, and talks very demurely of law and order. 
It has gathered to itself the conservatism of the 
North and of the South; and with the specious 
cry of popular sovereignty” it seeks to march to 
victory. Kansas stands as a living monument of 
the kind of “popular sovereignty” the one idea 


would concede to the North ; and the support it 
receives from the other idea shows exactly what 
the people have to hope from the union of them 
both. It is precisely the “popular sovereignty ” 
the present perjured usurper of France permit¬ 
ted its people to have after the coup d’etat, by 
which he won his way to a throne through blood 
and carnage—if you vote as directed, you can 
vote—if not, not. A slave State, Missouri—one 
of the twins of 1820—fears the effect upon her 
property if a free State is formed on her border, 
and her citizens regulated the “ popular sover¬ 
eignty ” of Kansas. A Legislature, thus chosen, 
passed laws which must disfranchise every emi¬ 
grant from the free States, yet we must have 
“ law and order; ” and the party of two ideas, 
claiming to be the same that stood by the free¬ 
men of Rhode Island in their revolution—the 
same that trampled upon a law of my State, di¬ 
viding the county I represnt into two election 
districts, revolutionary resistance to which gave 
political prominence to one of the Senators from 
Ohio, now loudest in his love of “ law and order;” 
this party of two ideas tells the people of this 
Republic, that these laws, which insult the intel¬ 
ligence of freemen, must be obeyed. If they are 
enforced—if the freemen who have gone to Kan¬ 
sas to make free homes for themselves and their 
children are forced to bite the dust, by submit¬ 
ting to those iniquitous laws, let it be written 
of them, as was done by the conqueror of the 
beautiful capital of Poland, when from its smo¬ 
king ruins, amid its silent streets and enslaved 
people, surrounded by the tinselled manikins of 
tyranny, he proclaimed, “ Order reigns in War¬ 
saw.” 

Let me say here to those who represent the 
Democracy of the South, not the new recruits, 
but the old soldiers, You are trying a danger¬ 
ous experiment upon the Democracy of the 
North. As a law-abiding and compact-keeping 
people, they will favorably compare with you 
and yours; and their party attachment has 
been proven by their patient endurance for the 
past twelve years. They have seen their cher¬ 
ished statesmen struck down on the battle-field, 
because they would not surrender the convic¬ 
tions of their lives, or degraded because they 
did. They have borne all this, because they 
loved the party, the portrait of which I have 
drawn. They loved it, because of the perils 
and dangers through which they had passed 
with it; they loved it for its birth, its youth, its 
manhood ; do not make them curse it for its 
old age. The North has its education ; it is 
that of equality; it is natural that its people 
should be opposed to Slavery; they have been 
taught that the Constitution recognised Slave¬ 
ry only where it existed, and they are opposed 
to its extension. The force of party attach¬ 
ment, the habitude of a life, may draw the sup¬ 
port of the old soldiers to the party which has 
the name they know, but the young and think¬ 
ing minds are being lost to you. No party, 
with “ law and order ” as its motto, and the 





6 


extension of human Slavery as its design, can 
flourish at the North. Our people wftukkhave 
to unlearn the teaching of their schools, the 
impulses of their natures would have. to be 
changed, before they could enroll themselves 
in such a party. 

You have brought your cherished institution 
into the political arena; you have submitted it 
to the resolves of Conventions and the keeping 
of a party. Flushed with your triumphs, with 
an unsated ambition for dominion and power, 
you grasp boldly. The Kansas bill, and its 
known fruits, you hail as victories ; but have 
you thought of the heart-burnings, the disaf¬ 
fection, the mortifications, it has caused at the 
North? Brave and loyal hearts have quit, in 
disgust, a party in which they could not pre¬ 
serve their self-respect. At my home, I know 
men whose support would be an honor to any 
cause—men whose lives have been passed in 
the thickest of the fight, battling for Democrat¬ 
ic truths—men of brain, representative men, 
honest men—who are not now of you, nor with 
you, in this fight. These men could bear with 
your infirmities for the good of their party; but 
your ambition has left them no alternative. 
They are now isolated—acting with no organi¬ 
zation, standing aloof, the memory of the past 
yet exercising its potent influence. But this 
cannot last. Such men must act; they have 
principles, talent, influence ; and they are sub¬ 
tile tools in the hands of workers. In your race 
of ambition do not overreach yourselves. “ Be¬ 
ware I behind you stalks the headsman I ” 

There is a limit beyond which it is not safe 
to go. We of the North are taunted as being 
foes of the Union, and hear daily threats from 
the South of a dissolution of the national com¬ 
pact,, if any of the laws passed by Congress 
where the negro is concerned are repealed. 
The counsels of the Father of his Country are 
invoked, to show us that Liberty itself is not 
as dear as the existence of the Union. He was 
a great and good man; and he did leave in his 
last will and testament food for the reflection 
of those who claim to be his testamentary 
legatees. Let me quote from that instrument, 
which of all others more clearly shows the 
workings of a man’s heart, the will of Wash¬ 
ington : 

“Upon the decease of my wife, it is my will 
1 and desire that all the slaves whom I hold in 
1 my own right shall receive their freedom. To 
1 emancipate them during her life would, though 
i earnestly wished by me, be attended with such 
1 insuperable difficulties, on account of their 
‘ intermixture by marriage with the dower 
1 negroes, as to excite the most painful sensa- 
1 tions, if not disagreeable consequences, to the 
‘ latter, while both are in the occupancy of the 
4 same proprietor— it not being in my power, 

1 under the tenure by which the dower negroes 
1 are held, to manumit them .” ***** 
“And I do, moreover, most pointedly and most 
* solemnly enjoin it upon my executors, here- 


1 after named, or the survivors of them, to see 
jfcfeh-at this clause respecting slaves, and every 
^qpart thereof, be religiously fulfilled at the 
f etffhh at which it is directed to take place, 
1 wuhoyi evasion , neglect , or delay.” 

We have frequent extracts from Washing¬ 
ton’s Farewell Address, warning us against 
sectional divisions; but if those who quote 
them had only a tithe of the spirit breathed in 
the foregoing clause of his posthumous farewell 
of earth, we should have no occasion for his 
warnings. His opinion of Slavery, as a moral 
wrong, is evinced clearly in the quotation I 
have made; and if his example had been fol¬ 
lowed, it would never have become the great 
political wrong it now i3. But with the one 
idea, as a moral wrong, I do not choose to 
meddle, further than to show to those who are 
so loud in their denunciations of those who do 
not agree with them that Slavery is a divine 
institution, that the Father of hisCountry taught 
us differently. It is as a political wrong that 
we of . the North wish to deal with that institu¬ 
tion, leaving to those States which have it all its 
blessings. We do not envy them its possession ; 
we do not ask them to divide it with us ; we 
say to them, “ If it is meet and good in your 
eyes, keep it.” With it, as a political wrong, 
we have the right, and it is our duty , to deal. 
We have our interests as well as the South; 
and it is our interest to see that free labor is 
not supplanted by slave. We believe this to 
be a Democratic Union, where the majority is 
to determine, under the organic law, the des¬ 
tination of this Republic. It cannot possibly 
be admitted that a minority, under the pretext 
of a right which is a huge and monstrous 
wrong, shall rule the majority, and shape our 
Government to its own purposes and interests. 
To permit this is to not only abnegate our 
rights, but also to refuse to do our duty. It is 
folly to say that it is no concern of ours whether 
Slavery goes to the Territories or not—that we 
have free States, and that should content us, 
while the one idea, steadily and persistently, 
attends to its own propagation and extension. 
The political power of this Republic must be the 
reflex of some principle; and it is essential, if 
we wish to preserve the spirit of our Govern¬ 
ment, that that power should be the represent¬ 
ative of the thrift, prosperity, and energy, of the 
free States. We are told that our claim to 
this is not well founded; and we have an array 
of figures, almost incomputable, representing, 
in current coin, the value of some millions of 
human chattels. At the North, we have no such 
values ; but we have the energy which springs 
from a laudable hope—the skill which emanates 
from free minds. 

It is a question of vital importance to the 
labor of the North, whether our Territories 
shall be carved out into free States or not. It 
is a question of interest —it is a question of life 
itself. Even bow we are told, among the new 
heresies preached by the one idea---and that, 




7 


too, by distinguished Democrats of t 
that it is better for labor to be owl^dfthj 
be employed ; that, at the South, Iqfao'f; 
unquiet contests with capital, be^gifl^ 
capital owns labor. And these instfltifi 
menta are addressed to the people of 
where labor is proud of ita indepenj' 
jealous of its rights. There seem 
limit to the assumptions of the one idea; it 
claims rights which are wrongs; it threatens to 
subvert our Government, if its Democratic the¬ 
ory of a majority rule is put in practice; and 
now it dares to compare its system of slave la¬ 
bor with that of the toilers of the North. I ask 
the mechanics, the laborers of the North, to 
mark the progress of events, to lay to their 
hearts these taunting declarations, and then re¬ 
member that every slave State added'to this 
Union gives power to those who think that la¬ 
bor is benefited by being owned. 

And, as a counterpoise to all these dogmas, 
assumptions, and clutching ambition, the 
“ rights of the South ” stun our ears, and be¬ 
wilder our senses. Why, Slavery has no rights; 
it is a thing of sufferance and suffering, and is 
a denial of all right. The North has yielded 
to the South the sufferance to hold slaves ; but 
it will never consent that what it believes to be 
a wrong shall be made a pestilence, with which 
the free Territories of the Republic shall be 
overwhelmed. If it was only a contest for po¬ 
litical power, the North would be untrue to its 
duties, did it permit the extension of Slavery; 
but as it is a question of interest , the Kansas 
bill has u sown dragon's teeth, which will 
spring up armed men.” The challenge is ac¬ 
cepted ; it is not a fight of one campaign; it 
will take many, but the result cannot be 
doubted. 

Mr. Chairman, we live in an eventful period: 
the next five years are to be decisive ones in the 
destiny of this Republic. We are hurrying for¬ 
ward to an era in our political history which is 
to shape our course, for good or evil, for a long 
future. We have seen the Republic turned wide¬ 
ly from the path in which its founders believed 
it would tread; we have seen what they consid¬ 
ered a wrong converted into an exciting and ag¬ 
gressive right; it is for us of the North—we 
who are willing to abide by the doctrines of the 
fathers of the Revolution, to at least make the 
attempt to right these wrongs. Are we to be 
told that Slavery is the equal of Freedom, and 
its rights to the Territory the same, and not de¬ 
nounce the heresy ? Shall we listen to the as¬ 
sertion, that the flag of which we are so proud, 
and under which Liberty was won, carries Sla¬ 
very in its folds wherever it floats, and not blush 
with shame ? Are we to know that the only use 
and purpose of this Union to the one idea is, 
that it protects and extends Slavery, and assent 


it ? We havo had enough of 
^tfrfona ofilthe great parties 
iedjk jfecaura it was afraid to 
er fim abandoned its principles 
£affard To. dife.| The two ideas, 

. |nce,tuce paarshalling their hosts 
hot, and^tjjs.^img; that an opposing 
n4or ouivT'drrftkmes, was gathering 
its forces for the battle it cannot avoid with 
honor, and with which it cannot fail to be vic¬ 
torious. Let us be true to ourselves and to 
those who are to follow us. Remember— 

“ We sow the golden grain to-day , 

The harvest comes to-morrow 

But, to make the future what it should be, 
willing hearts are needed. The cold breath of 
personal ambition, grasping for the power won 
by the triumph of pure principles, will wither 
the fruit before it is ripened. History is full of 
the wrecks of ruined nations, whose peop^ 
sought and won Freedom only to lose it under 
leaders who knew no higher purpose of life 
than the vain ambition to win power, position, 
a name—even at the cost of the Liberty of a 
trusting people. We have enough of brawling 
patriotism--the noisy declamation of poor earth¬ 
worms, who crawl through mire to gain what 
they seek ; but of honest devotees, of unselfish 
laborers, alasj Liberty has but fewl The war¬ 
ring antagonism between Liberty and Despot¬ 
ism, the rude jousts between Right and Might, 
which fill the pages of history with the romance 
of life, furnish to the thinker the solution of the 
causes of man’s failure to be free. The earth- 
born ambition of the few has wrecked the hopes 
of the people in every struggle of which we 
have a record. To us, who have a mission and 
a time never before accorded to man, this fact 
should strike deep in our hearts—chastening, 
cleansing, and ennobling. The short cycle of 
human existence makes but a shadowless mark 
upon the roll of Time; and he who fills this 
brief hour with his own selfish plottings, though 
he may win a page in history, has lost the di¬ 
vinity of his nature in the sordid meanness of 
the mere man. With a just cause, an honest 
people, and unselfish leaders, our wildest 
dreams of man’s advancement might become 
sober truths: lose but one link of this mystic 
chain, and all is lost. In the language of one 
of the master-minds of our age, “ What State 
could fall, what Liberty decay, if the zeal of 
man’s noisy patriotism were as pure as the 
silent loyalty of a woman’s love ?” 

Mr. Chairman, I have finished my task. If 
what I have spoken shall awaken a thought in 
one brain, or make one pulse quicken with a 
purer love of the cause of truth and humanity, 
I will be more than repaid. If I fail to do 
either, I have left, as my own reward, the 
pleasing consciousness of a duty performed. 





WASHINGTON, D. C. 


BUELL & BLANCHARD, PRINTERS. 


1856. 


14 ® 








* *° * 

0 ° 

c\ ^ V . * 



: W ; 

' v % 


* ^ -Cr ..*'•♦ " 



o ,0 v\ 

»* «>'' o *7f*^.' o %. , 

r < v ^ * “ * A® " 1 O 

> v o. <o **•«-' ^ v * s 

** a .*jdfer* ^ a * % & **■ 

47 v- oVM\K* av <b, • * A> ^ 

,(y o *o •. * A C *■ 7. r« o^ 

o ^Lwk,+ °-> .A *7c<^<v% ^ .cr > -***-•■# o. 






j- 0 ^ 





° *° ■%. 

# " A 0 V •'’* A ^ - • - • A' 

0 A A ^k>„ % A?,***'- 

❖ v -i- -nar- ^ v * 

,v* %,*. *'•'.«« 4 O •*>~ A ^ A *< ,« « 

^ 0 <> M «* <$> *«•'*-* ^b A V 6 o * ® ♦ *<£ 

‘ .**&*. V 0 , ‘° .-^ \ / % 0 4 

v *^~v % ' ; -- v / v *^’\a 

«U* i£Sk\ % A : §M£°* • 

;• A% - -SSK*V*X : - 

°*--~-- v A .-^Srk-^ <? s*<mk °* ■ 








<5®^ 




,* Q 0 > *^f,‘ «.► 

4 V ^ ^ <<> # f 1 * „<*)* 

A V' . « 0 ‘ n ■* * °/ ^ 4 s **' 

i£ 'P^. °,WMvtf 4 * "** u Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 

4 ^ ^ 






Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2010 


^ PreservationTechnologies 


A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
' + k (724)779-2111 





V V °<t» * • • 0 

■ ^ * cS^> - %- ^ .»*• 

! ilSfe; >v .Am//Ao 

c. C ' o * a^' v ^> 

* , 0 . oW M w * A v *>*> 

No / *> *' .0 C> '«>.** /V + ^-^f* A 

-* TT r 0 ■* ®-» j'fr • *- *■£ „(y 

^0 X • jfiln^*'* ^o K 




»< ■» 


^r > >6 «o \0 v\ *• O. • 

w * k> ^'v.uvvvw* » v <#* * <Zyy//l)^W > „■<?- ^ * 

.’ a-^ ° 0 *T*«fv o° “* \^r»* *> o_ ■ 

a* ,..., ^ **° o f 0 ,.. •*’ \^ ... *V 

a v *£> Ay o'. ^ V . ' 1 a./* C* 


t 1 * 



p Z‘‘ * 
v\ v » 

*• 

v - 

O, 'O . * 

♦ o 

1 o «J 

> . <N ^ 

*b ^ » 




v*^ 

* v> s % °o 

A’ <* *'~T.‘' , 6 ^ '^ ‘ — , 

# .»j&% X 0 o* % ,*> 

'* 'V»A ^.4? * 




o v 


***** f°° \ *w>/ v^v \; 

0 ,<y *fK\5OH, 0 %<* * £S®3$ • ' ( vo c£ 

^ <? v^ v °^E5K r ' 

V X ** 1 4 ✓ 0 c5* 'Qr* 0 tWvd^VAT * -■ Vg^^-«y • a 

-Os • * A? o> o V * A V *>, . 

<A * 0 V * 0 .** A <. + ^f 7 T‘ G 

o w a ^ «4> l 1 m "^ > _ • h « * 

% 

♦ 
















































































































































































































































































































































































